Tax Foundation Rips Santorum Tax Plan (Grade: D+)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | 1/6/2012 | Kristina Peterson

[JediJones]

An antitax advocacy group zinged Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum’s tax plan, giving him a grade of “D+” grade and the dubious honor of proposing what “may be the worst idea of any of the Republican candidates.”

”The good news is Santorum has gotten more specific about his tax plan since last month when we gave him a D+,” economist William McBride wrote on Thursday. “The bad news is… he’s gotten more specific.”

Mr. McBride said the biggest problem with Mr. Santorum’s proposal is the sharply different corporate tax rates he would establish. Mr. Santorum would halve the corporate tax rate to 17.5% from its current top rate of 35%. Manufacturers, however, would not have to pay any corporate taxes.

Mr. McBride said the idea is “grossly unfair,” and unlikely to gain traction in Washington. If it did, he said, many businesses would “suddenly claim to be a manufacturer.”

The tax group also took aim at Santorum’s suggestion to triple the tax deduction families can take for each child. “This is obviously a big tax cut, and might spur growth, or it might just spur child making,” Mr. McBride wrote. The Tax Foundation echoed concerns expressed earlier this week by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that tripling the child tax deduction could push more low-income families off the tax rolls.

While the Santorum campaign has filled in some of the details in recent weeks, big ones remain missing, Mr. McBride wrote. The plan would collapse the current six rates to just two — 10% and 28% — but it doesn’t specify who would pay those rates, he said, adding: ”That’s kind of important.”

[SunkenCiv]

So, who pays the bills at the Tax Foundation? Thanks JediJones.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Newt is the only guy with a real plan.

[CainConservative]

“For an “anti-tax” group they sure are complaining a lot about some wanting to CUT taxes.”

Bingo!

[Carry_Okie]

Not as long as more kids equals more unfunded entitlement spending and more deficit spending.

If that is what you think of taxpayers' children you have a very poor understanding upon how much we depend upon them for our future, entitlements or no.

[CainConservative]

Really, C's and D's for our final two conservatives in the race makes me question this.

I'd give Rick and Newt SOLID B's.

Fair Tax advocates get the ONLY A's.

[FreeReign]

Not as long as more kids equals more unfunded entitlement spending and more deficit spending.

If that is what you think of taxpayers' children you have a very poor understanding upon how much we depend upon them for our future, entitlements or no.

Your response is utter nonsense.

There are some types of federal government spending where an increase in population equals a decrease in the tax load for individual tax payers. Defense spending is one such example. We don't need more defense spending when the population increases. In those cases, an increase in population is a good thing.

Unfortunately the large majority of our budget is unfunded entitlements, where a person takes out more from the system than they put in. As long as that is the case, increasing the population DOES NOT decrease the tax load, it only increases it.

That's an FDR type of Ponzi scheme.

BTW, why does every response from you contain snark?

[Marguerite]

“The Reverend Rick HOME SCHOOLS! What’s not to love and believe everything his hollow promises and rhetoric claims?”

... paid by other people’s money! Another socialistic approach he himself practiced by taking taxpayers’ money to homeschool his own children.

The problem with Reverend Rick is that he thinks everything he’s done is RIGHT, and everything other did or do is WRONG. He want his “morality” to be the template for all the land.

He hasn’t yet said what his intentions are concerning dozens of millions Americans who are not Christians by faith, but I can see clearly what he thinks of them.

[FreeReign]

Really, C's and D's for our final two conservatives in the race makes me question this. I'd give Rick and Newt SOLID B's.

I agree that both Newt's and Rick's grade is too low. For example if Santorum's grade is D+, that doesn't leave much room to grade Obama who wishes to raises our taxes and who wishes to make the tax code more "progressive".

That said, there are criticisms in this article that are valid.

[Ozymandias Ghost]

“My suspicion is that it would spur more low-income households to have children, which would then need to be supported by the welfare state..."

______________

JJ-

Ir's not just that; the IRS lists sharing/borrowoing dependents as one of its Top 12 “Dirty Dozen” Tax Scams. It's a HUGE (or “HUGH;” if you prefer) problem and Santorum wants to compound it w/his ill-conceieved tax plan.

“Share/Borrow EITC Dependents"

“Unscrupulous tax preparers “share” one client's qualifying children with another client in order to allow both clients to claim the Earned Income Tax Credit. For example, one client may have four children but only needs to list two to get the maximum EITC. The preparer will list two children on the first client’s return and the other two on another client’s tax return. The preparer and the client “selling” the dependents split a fee. The IRS prosecutes the preparers of such fraudulent claims, and participating taxpayers could be subject to civil penalties.”

Source Link: http://www.taxhelpattorney.com/articles/common-tax-scams.html

[Yaelle]

This is essential. Our country would be better off if children had a parent home with them. 90% of married parents want one parent at home with the kids. Maids or institutions are just not enough, mostly.

[Yaelle]

I’d like to see more analysis on the child tax credit as an economic benefit. My suspicion is that it would spur more low-income households to have children, which would then need to be supported by the welfare state in countless other ways for decades to come. It would be dubious to me whether the financial losses on that welfare would pay off with increased social security revenue later on.

---

But the 45% at the bottom pay no taxes!

[Mariner]

"he tax group also took aim at Santorum’s suggestion to triple the tax deduction families can take for each child."

It's high time for an equal protection suit against the current tax code.

Santorum is NO DIFFERENT THAN THE COMMIES NOW IN POWER. HE WOULD USE THE POWER OF THE TAX CODE AND GOVERNMENT TO FURTHER HIS SOCIAL OBJECTIVES.

A statist by any other name...

Of course there are hundreds of folks on Free Republic who think he's a "Real Conservative" because he doesn't believe Obama is a "Real Christian".

We're doomed.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Bump that.

[Mariner]

"The tripling of the child deduction is LONG overdue."

Ridiculous. You don't think that's discriminatory against those who can't?

How about stop picking winners and losers with the tax code and moving to a flat tax?

Of course that doesn't meet the needs of the statists.

[Gaffer]

A nebulous group’s report/assessment (not specifically identified in the excerpt and certainly not identified early on) isn’t worth the time it takes to read it. No name, no mention of backing, no nothing but citation of faults with whoever’s plan...this is not the way you debunk anything in my opinion, regardless of whether they suit your candidate or not.

[tallyhoe]

# Commit to cut $5 trillion of federal spending within 5 years.
# Implement Strong America Now reform through Lean Six Sigma management process as a key engine for cutting government waste and improving efficiency.
# Immediately reduce federal (non-defense discretionary spending) to 2008 levels through across the board spending cuts.
# Freeze defense spending levels for 5 years and reject automatic cuts.
# Freeze spending levels for social programs for 5 years such as Medicaid, Housing, Education, Job Training, and Food Stamps, time limit restrictions, and block grant to the States like in Welfare Reform.

[tallyhoe]

1. Cut and simplify personal income taxes by cutting the number of tax rates to just two - 10% and 28% and return to Reagan era pro-growth tax rate;
2. Simplify the tax code and reduce middle income taxes by eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT);
3. Simplify the tax code, encourage savings and investment, and reduces taxes by eliminating the Death Tax;
4. Lower the Capital Gains and Dividend tax rates to 12% to spur economic growth and investment;
5. Reduce taxes for families by tripling the personal deduction for each child;
6. Reduce and simplify taxes for families by eliminating marriage tax penalties throughout the federal tax code;
7. Retain deductions for charitable giving, home mortgage interest, healthcare, retirement savings, and children;
8. Eliminate the cap on deductions for losses incurred in the sale of a principal residence;
9. Cut the corporate income tax rate in half to make our businesses competitive around the world, from 35% to 17.5%;
10. Eliminate the corporate income tax for manufacturers to spur middle income job creation in the United States and benefit from the job multiplier effect in manufacturing;
11. Increase the Research & Development Tax Credit from 14% to 20% and make it permanent to spur on innovation in America;
12. Eliminate the tax on repatriated taxable corporate income invested for manufacturers equipment investment, 5.25% corporate tax rate on other repatriated income invested in the USA, and 100% expensing for new business equipment;

[Gaffer]

Google Tax Policy Center, then locate and google the center’s founders: the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution.....scroll down through their list of ‘experts’ and you’ll quickly see this organization is anything but nonpartisan....the surnames read like a veritable Quran corps coupled with Chinese, Indian and other nationalities -— Bluntly, you’d be hard-pressed to find a MacGregor, Williams or a Smith in the bunch.......

Report is subterfuge bullshit.

[conservativejoy]

Your Post 42 is a spot on analysis on how government is destroying our economy.

You hit the nail on the head about the regulation and over taxation of businesses.

Along with repealing regulations, I like Newt’s plan of allowing businesses to take a 100% tax deduction for equipment purchases and improvements in the first year.

That is a huge step in the right direction to enable employers to have the capitol to hire people. It will stimulate the manufacturing sector by the increased demand for machinery and equipment.

You have a lot of good, thoughtful information in your posts. I find that to be characteristic of voters who demand vison and solutions in a candidate.

Keep up the good work!

[plain talk]

This type of thinking is Rick’s problem — he thinks government social engineering is great ... as long as he’s the one doing the dictating of what is “good” and “bad” behavior.

Yes - I like the way you said that and it bears repeating. Santorum's background is one of a mediocre bureaucrat so this kind of tax plan is expected. The tripling of the child tax credit appears to be his way of beating the family values drum but we need a flat tax not more deductions.